You are here:
BBC >
Science & Nature >
TV & Radio Follow-up >
Horizon
Broadcasting Standards Commission - Synopsis of adjudication
Horizon: Atlantis Reborn (November 4th 1999)
The BSC considered
8 points of complaint from Mr Hancock and 2 from Mr Bauval. Only 1
of Mr Hancock's 8 points was upheld, together with a point of Mr Bauval's
which concerned the same issue.
The Adjudication
The Commission concluded that "the programme makers acted in good
faith in their examination of the theories of Mr Hancock and Mr Bauval".
Mr Hancock complained that he had been treated unjustly or unfairly
in that:
- The programme gave an unfair account of his case for a significant
correlation between the Great Sphinx and the constellation Leo.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to
Mr Hancock in these matters.
- The programme gave an unfair account of his case for a significant
correlation between the Angkor temples in Cambodia and the constellation
Draco.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to
Mr Hancock on this point.
- The programme unfairly omitted arguments in support of his
belief that the Great Sphinx was much older than generally accepted,
and wrongly implied that he had originated this theory.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to Mr Hancock
on this point.
- The programme unfairly excluded the views of a supporter of Mr Hancock's
belief that Yonaguni, an underwater formation off Japan, was man-made.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to
Mr Hancock in this regard.
- The programme wrongly credited him with originating the theory
that Atlantis was Antarctica.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to
Mr Hancock in this regard.
- The programme did not fairly represent his views on carbon-dating.
Adjudication: The Commission finds that the programme’s
treatment of this aspect did not result in any significant unfairness
to Mr Hancock.
- The programme had created the impression that he was an intellectual fraudster
who had put forward half baked theories and ideas in bad faith,
and that he was incompetent to defend his own arguments.
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to
Mr Hancock in these matters.
Mr Hancock and Mr Bauval both
complained that they had been treated unjustly or unfairly in that:
- The programme unfairly omitted one of their arguments in
rebuttal of a speaker who criticised the theory of a significant
correlation between the Giza pyramids and the belt stars of the
constellation Orion (the "correlation theory").
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds that this was unfair
to Mr Hancock and to Mr Bauval.
Mr Bauval complained that he had been treated unjustly or unfairly in that:
- The programme had not allowed him an opportunity to respond
to a further point of criticism of the correlation theory.
Adjudication: The Commission finds no unfairness to
Mr Bauval on this point.
- The programme had created a "strong implication" that his
theory was a "con".
Adjudication: [The Commission] finds no unfairness to
Mr Bauval in these matters.
'Atlantis Reborn' programme page
|
|